Last weekend’s March for Justice and Unity, sponsored by the Black Leadership Coalition, drew a crowd estimated at over 2,000.It was the largest demonstration against police brutality by Black people in Los Angeles.(The Leadership Coalition included over 30 organizations- churches, civil rights, education and business groups and Black elected officials.) The march and rally also stressed the need for unity in dealing with other quality of life issues such as improving the quality of education for Black children and eliminating economic disparities in the Black community.

The question is, will the unity, spirit and demands at the march be sustained?To put the issue in a broader context, today’s column revisits an earlier one on the dismantling of the Voting Rights Act as an example of the need to sustain righteous Black outrage.

Outrage in the Black Community over the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision gutting the Voting Rights Act (VRA) was thoroughly justified, but has not been sustained. For years, in similar and countless other cases, the outrage has been episodic, not sustainable. Within a short time, it’s business as usual and outrage a faded memory.

Countless examples of righteous outrage over the years forgotten, but no less important include:Leonard Deadwyler, shot and killed by LAPD when rushing his expectant wife to the hospital; unarmed Eula Love, killed by LAPD; Rodney King, beaten mercilessly by LAPD; unarmed 13-year-old Devin Brown, killed by LAPD, and more recently, Trayvon Martin. Similarly, wide spread dissatisfaction over public schools’ failure to educateBlack children and abuse by LAPD and LA County Sheriff deputies were met mostly with silence.

Following the Supreme Court’s decision on dismantling the VRA, reactions ranged from “great,“ (conservatives) to “deeply disappointed,” (President Obama) and “outrageous” (Congresswoman Karen Bass).Section 4 is the ”covered formula” the federalgovernment uses to determine which states and counties are subject to continued oversight.Chief Justice John Roberts said the formula was “outdated and unworkable,” and the Court agreed.

Under Section 5, any changes in voting laws and procedures in the covered states—including much of the South—and certain counties in California, had to be pre-cleared with Washington.Butthe court ruled Section 5 cannot be effectively enforced because it relies heavily on the covered formula, albeit the main tool for protecting Blacks and other minorities from state and local governments that set unfair barriers to the polls.Without Section 5, the very power and effect of the entire VRA will crumble.

In a 5-4 vote, the Supreme Court ruled that monitoring voting procedures under the law was overly burdensome and unwarranted.(This, despite Congress having re-authorized Sections 4 and 5 as recently as 2006.) And despite the bogus claim that America is a post-racial society, race was at the center of the VRA debate and there is overwhelming evidence that Blacks, in particular, continue to encounter targeted discrimination at polling places throughout America.

Dissenting, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said Congress re-authorized the VRA-including Sections 4 and 5 with overwhelming bipartisan support, “….and (since) that body is empowered to enforce civil rights amendments by appropriate legislation it merits this court’s utmost respect.”(Justice Kennedy voted with the majority; he is usually the No swing vote on civil rights.)

Conservatives argue “ancient formulas” are still being applied, not to reverse discrimination, but to benefit a particular political party.Liberals, citing strong evidence that Blacks and other people face continuing barriers in and outside of the South, counter that Section 5 and federal oversight are being demonized by the right for political gain with the intent of continuing to divide Americans over race.

Depending on the particular opinion poll, Americans are sharply divided on affirmative action.Leading up to the Supreme Court’s VRA decision, an opinion poll by ABC News and the Washington Post showed that 76% of Americans opposed affirmative action in college admission.But a poll conducted by the Public Religion Research Institute found that 68% of Americans favored the principles of affirmative action. Similar conflicting findings are shown in other polls about the role the government should play in trying to improve conditions for Blacks and other people of color. Polls, notwithstanding, Blacks are still racism’ most demonized target.

The court punted on affirmative action, (Fisher v. University of Texas).It neither ruled nor gutted affirmative action, sending the case back to the Appellate Court for further hearing.Many contend in doing so, it reaffirmed the court’s doctrine in the landmark case, Grutter v. Bollinger, (2003).In that case, essentially, the court found that race, ethnicity and gender can be used in admissions decisions in colleges and universities as long as neither is used as a primary or unilateral factor.

The main point is that Black people understand episodic outrage, including marches and rallies, is validated by sustainable unified action. In light of continuing racism and systemic race-based barriers, the Black community must recognize and acknowledge its progress and survival is in its own hands. However, many of us,so conditioned to feel second class, do not see ourselves having a role in developing a critically needed Black united front. Therefore, change requires a new mindset, education, organizing, mobilizing and sustainable action. Righteous outrage can, and should, be is a launching pad for Blacks to craft self-determined strategies designed to forge a more rewarding future.

Last Saturday we came together from many backgrounds and beliefs to hold a march and rally with the essential, overarching and interrelated purpose of building unity and seeking justice in the midst of a nation-wide struggle to end police violence. And we saw this coming together, in defiant and righteous resistance, as a necessary and self-conscious contribution to the many efforts throughout the country to rebuild the movement and continue the larger ongoing struggle of our people, Black people, to create the just and good society we all want, work for and deserve to live in.

In our Mission Statement we noted that, “We come together in the midst of a continuously rising tide of heightened moral outrage and righteous resistance against police violence and the general systemic violence and injustices that still shape and limit the conditions and capacity of Black people to live lives of dignity, security, well-being, equal opportunity and deserved promise. Moreover, we come together as a community in a united spirit and collective voice to reaffirm the dignity and rights of Black people, especially our right to life, to security of person and people, and to freedom from unjust and unjustifiable systemic violence in any form—police or otherwise. And we come together in unity and struggle, to resist official and unofficial violence against us, to seek justice for the victims and for our people, and to build an enduring united front as a wall and way of protection, progress and promise around and for our community, our youth and all our people.

In this regard, we commit ourselves to engage in continuing united efforts to bring about an end to police violence, foster truly transformative change in the criminal justice system, build and strengthen community, and expand our historic and ongoing struggle for racial and social justice. Thus, we stand in active solidarity with the wide range of organizations and persons in this struggle for unity, justice and police accountability. And we applaud and support the young people who have joined in the ongoing historic struggle of our people, who have shown praiseworthy initiative, leadership and sustainability, and who recognize and respond positively to the intergenerational and collective nature and demands of a struggle for and by the whole people.

Furthermore, we note and raise the painful questioning of how do we save, make safe and protect our young people and ourselves from such a high level and rate of race-targeted violence from police sworn to protect and serve. And we wonder how do we advise our young men to act in a context in which so many are regularly targeted (profiled), stopped and searched, harassed, humiliated, abused, beaten, tasered, shot or wounded and killed? Certainly, we also are aware that in such a context of terror and apparent reckless and cold disregard for Black life and Black rights, even the best of counsel still leaves an unacceptable amount of apprehension, fear and terror, and thus we are committed to a unity in work and struggle to lessen and end this unconscionable state of things.

We also understand that our struggle is larger than that against police violence and against the unjust criminal justice system as a whole. Indeed, our struggle is also against the systemic violence of injustice in education, employment, economic initiatives, politics, housing, healthcare, and every other area of life in which Black people are denied the capacity and conditions to live lives of dignity and decency, security, self-determination and shared good. And to achieve these rightful and righteous goals, we recognize the need for an active and ongoing unity, operational unity, i.e., unity in diversity, unity without uniformity and unity in purpose, principles and practice. In addition, we recognize the related need for sustainability, sacrifice, resilience, resourcefulness, cooperative projects, ongoing collaboration, community building and strengthening, and constant struggle on every level.

Our demands are both short term and long term and reflect both local and national conditions and similar demands. They are: the immediate firing and indictment of the officers who killed Ezell Ford and the bringing to closure the six-month investigation of his killing; body cameras for all law enforcement officers and charges of obstruction of justice for any officer who turns the camera off, alters, damages or tampers with it in any disabling way; and collection of comprehensive data by law enforcement and reporting to the Department of Justice any cases of unjustified use of lethal force, racial targeting, stopping without reasonable cause and other questionable practices. In addition, we demand: the creation of a state task force that engages the community in dialogue on ways to increase and insure police accountability; appointment of a special prosecutor to investigate and prosecute cases where lethal force is used; creation of a Los Angeles County Special Investigation Unit for lethal force cases; and creation of an independent civilian review board to oversee LAPD policies and practices.

Finally, we demand an ongoing law enforcement dialog with the community on issues of concern and urgency; demilitarization of the police in terms of weapons, equipment and practices; strengthening the practice of community policing in hiring, residence requirements and interactions; and review and change of police practices and personnel policies, especially discipline, cultural training and psychological evaluations to move the department away from its racialized and militarized practices in Black and other communities of color. And we take special notice of and support existing efforts to pass legislation to facilitate changes contributing to achieving any of the goals cited.

Our purpose is clear; our demands are just and the struggle before us is urgent and unavoidable. We realize that the way forward will not be easy or short , and there are many difficulties and dangers ahead, but we are committed to continue the struggle, to fight the good fight, and to bring into being the just and good society our people have longed and fought for through centuries of suffering, sacrifice and relentless resistance. And given this awesome tradition and history of struggle, the urgency of the issues before us and our obligation to future generations, we cannot choose or do otherwise”.

Our march for unity and justice was held on February 21st, the 50th anniversary of the assassination and martyrdom of El Hajj Malik El Shabazz, Min. Malcolm X. On this sacred Day of Sacrifice, we also paid rightful homage to Malcolm, noting that his life and death offer us a model and mirror of excellence by which we can measure and mold our lives around his ethical principles and practice of bearing witness to truth, serving the people, struggling for liberation and making sacrifices necessary to free ourselves, be ourselves and build the good world we all want and deserve. And we remembered and paid homage to Malcolm for teaching us also to always build unity, seek justice, reaffirm our dignity, remember our divinity, do good, struggle hard and walk righteously in the world.

This is the month that marks the 50th anniversary of the martyrdom of El Hajj Malik El Shabazz, Min. Malcolm X, who was assassinated and martyred in the 39th year of his life, February 21, 1965, and who rose in radiance in the heavens and now sits in the sacred circle of the ancestors, among the doers of good, the righteous and the rightfully rewarded. In 1966, we of Us designated this day as Siku ya Dhabihu, the Day of Sacrifice, i.e., the day of his martyrdom. We can frame our conversation talking about his assassination, but that would focus on what the oppressor and his collaborators did, not what Malcolm sacrificed and achieved. And we would then miss the lessons of his martyrdom, his conscious choice to give himself to his people and to his faith in a lifetime of witnessing, i.e., teaching truth, service to the people, struggling for liberation, and ultimately sacrificing himself to open the way to a new and righteous world.

So, we remember and honor him in his praise names: Mlima, mountain, who would not move even during an earthquake under it; Moto wa Ogun, Ogun fire, burning bright everywhere, forever lighting the way forward; Mtafuta wa haki, justice seeker, who having been indicted with his people by society, turned the table around and put the judge, prosecutor, prison system, police and society itself on trial; Shahid, noble martyr, who gave his life so we could live free, fuller and more meaningful ones; and Mujahid, righteous soldier, who confronted the grey and greedy monsters of the world without fear, genuflection or forfeiture of the defiant dignity, integrity and audaciousness for which he will always be known.

Malcolm tells us in his Autobiography that he felt and hoped that his “life’s account, read objectively. . .might prove to be a testimony of some social value”. And surely, it is a testimony of great social value. Indeed, it is both testimony and testament, righteous witness and a sacred will, awesome evidence and instruction on how we can live our lives, and if need be, give them up with the unwavering commitment and uncompromising courage Malcolm modelled and mirrored for us. Malcolm thus taught us how to live and die, and even before his death, he had already given his whole life to his people, his faith and the struggle. It was again one of his defining features which he described as “the one hundred percent dedication I have to whatever I believe in”.

It is this total commitment to a cause—faith and freedom; the way of Allah and the liberation struggle of Black people—that molds and makes Malcolm into the man, Muslim and martyr he becomes. Malcolm stated that after studying history and Islam, “I had pledged on my knees to Allah to tell the white man about his crimes and the Black (people) the true teachings. . .(and) I don’t care of it costs me my life”. Indeed, he said, “This was my attitude. These were my uncompromising words, uttered everywhere, without hesitation or fear”.

Malcolm comes to the battlefield as a noble witness for his faith and for his people in the basic and early meaning of shahid in Islam. He declared that he spoke the plain and “naked truth”, free of falsehood, hype and hypocrisy. The oppressor, he tells us, “kept us in the darkness (and grave) of ignorance (and) made us spiritually blind by depriving us of the light of truth”. Malcolm offers us a liberating truth which “will truly set us free. . .open our eyes and enable us” to see ourselves and our oppressor” as we and he really are, and it will “give us strength and knowledge” to build a new, just and good world.

Malcolm, as a living witness, does not simply bear witness in speech, but also in conduct, especially in committed, unselfish and consistent service in reaffirmation of his faith, in furtherance of the aims and aspirations of his people and in meeting their concrete needs. Indeed, in daily life, the shahid bears witness to the truth of his or her faith by exemplifying a life of being good and doing good. And this is ultimately expressed in self-giving service to others, especially the masses of the people, as Malcolm taught, the needy, the downtrodden, and the vulnerable who constantly seek ways out and upward from oppression.

Especially within the context of the Nation of Islam, but also afterwards, Min. Malcolm built and supervised programs to give food to the hungry, homes to the homeless, treatment to the addict, freedom to the captive, jobs to the unemployed, spiritual anchor to the drifting, and ethical grounding to those caught up in the whirlwind of self-injuring and self-destructive practices.

In the final analysis, an ethics of martyrdom is an ethics of self-sacrifice, an ultimate self-giving rooted in conviction, love of the people and transformative struggle. Thus, his life was, of necessity, founded and flourished in righteous and relentless struggle, called in his Islamic faith jihad. As righteous struggle, jihad is both internal and external, and the internal struggle is not only to consistently live the good and righteous life, but also to prepare oneself for and engage in the external struggle to create a context of freedom, justice and peace in which this is best suited. And it is also to prepare one to accept, as Malcolm said, “that societies often have killed the people who have helped to change those societies”.

Here, Min. Malcolm, in anticipating his own martyrdom and that of Dr. King’s, noted that “in the racial climate of this country today, it’s anybody’s guess which of the ‘extremes’ in approach to the Black man’s problems might personally meet a fatal catastrophe first—‘non-violent’, Dr. King, or so-called ‘violent’ me”. Not knowing he would in fact be the first martyr, he still felt a sense of urgency to accomplish his work saying “Anything I do today, I regard as urgent. No man is given but so much time to accomplish whatever is his life’s work”. Thus, he was willing to make the sacrifice as he said, if he could “die having brought any light, having exposed any meaningful truth” that would help destroy racism and radically restructure society.

Malcolm’s life and death offer us a model and mirror of excellence by which we can measure and mold our lives around ethical principles and practices of witness, service, struggle and sacrifice. And it is this rich and enduring legacy of lessons he has given us that makes us praise him in the manner of our ancestors saying, “He will forever be a glorious spirit in the heavens, and a continuing powerful presence on earth. He shall be counted and honored among the ancestors. His name shall endure as a monument and what he has done on earth shall never perish or pass away”.

Islamic State atrocities are just among the latest thorny issues confronting President Barack Obama.We know there are several other extremely tough hot button issues, domestic and foreign, he must deal with. However, even though all U.S. presidents may have been similarly challenged (in varying degrees), it’s common knowledge that unlike none other in history, Obama has been the constant target of racist attacks aimed at damaging his character and effectiveness.That said, there are legitimate complaints about the president’s tendency to waver, and even backtrack, on important issues.And Blacks especially, must insist he gives sufficient priority to their issues—as he does to other groups like LGBT, Latinos and seniors.

We support President Obama because he is unquestionably a positive alternative to George W. Bush.However, like many others, Blacks especially, are very concerned about his propensity for over accommodation and reversing himself on major issues. For instance, on certain important domestic and foreign policy matters, his position is indistinguishable from that of his predecessor.He is a mega change, but as I cautioned even before he was elected, “Those who believe Obama to be a flawless icon will be sorely disappointed.”Legitimate questions regarding some of his positions were raised even during his first campaign , even among liberals and progressives. Grumbling began early over cabinet nominations, his equivocating on a campaign promise to improve faith-based aid on an agreement by religious charities not to discriminate in hiring, sending 17,000 additional troops to Afghanistan and the estimated $787 billion stimulus bill.

Many Americans and arguably, a majority of Blacks embraced the myth that Obama’s presidency would usher in an age of color-blindness, i.e., a “post-racial society.”This kind of thinking, though less pervasive now, served to blunt a comprehensive critique of Obama’s performance.

Ironically, Eric H. Holder, the nation’s first Black attorney-general, was at first anything but accommodating.He urged Americans, in and out of government, to action, stating, “The United States is a nation of cowards that urgently needs to begin to confronting the issue of race before it polarizes the country further….Though this nation has proudly thought of itself as an ethnic melting pot, in things racial, we have always been, and continue to be, in too many ways, a nation of cowards.”It is evident that even if Obama pre-sanctioned Holder’s remarks, he himself did not, and still, has not, clearly articulated a forceful position on the primacy of race in America.

As for Blacks, too many do not understand or admit that they are only one of many special interest groups, most of whom pound on Obama’s door much harder, louder and longer than they do.Moreover, unless Blacks present strategic initiatives from unified fronts, they will remain perpetual moaners outside of the loop of significant influence.Of course, unity among Black leadership is indispensable for securing and maintaining a place at the nation’s high level decision-making tables.

Six years into Obama’s presidency, many concerns have proven to be predictors.In short, concerns about his over-accommodation and downplaying the role of race were warranted, he has back-tracked on key issues and continued several of Bush’s policies.For example, he embraced national security policies he once criticized and early on, he decided to try five conspirators before a military commission in the prison at Guantanamo rather than in a civil court in the United States.Public criticism of terrorist trials in a U.S. civil court was widespread the president eventually backed down.Remember, in the first week of his presidency, Obama issued an Executive Order calling for the closure of Guantanamo within a year, “to restore the standards of due process and the core constitutional values that have made this country great, even in the midst of war, even in dealing with terrorists.”

Another example is Obama’s voluntarily continuing a Bush policy he criticized while campaigning, i.e., the “state secrets” doctrine which allows the government to shut down a trial on the grounds that it would betray sensitive information.The Bush Administration invoked the doctrine to prevent the disclosure of information about abuses in the war on terror.The Obama Administration has largely embraced the same doctrine.

Still another example is Obama’s signing an extension of three sections of the Patriot Act.One of the provisions allows investigators to obtain business records or other “tangible things” with a minimal showing to a judge of a connection to terrorism.Arguably, such vague criteria are prima facie discriminatory and would likely curtail the rights of those under investigation.

In addition to those mentioned, the list of Obama’s equivocations and accommodations is considerable, ranging from bailing out mega-banks and corporations at the expense of the average citizen, to his war in Libya- as opposed to Iraq and Afghanistan, which he inherited.Of course, he has had to operate under severe pressure, exemplified by the Tea Party movement and recent Republican control of the senate. Nonetheless, he has accomplished a great deal and heading the list is National Health Care, (the Affordable Care Act) for the first time in U.S. History.

Expectations were unrealistic. Barack Obama’s presidency has altered neither racism nor political and economic realities.But it has planted seeds of hope for actual change for those most in need. However, Blacks especially, must continue to insist that the president’s decisions and policies include discernible benefits for them as well.

In a recent song, “I Don’t Mind,” composed by R&B singer, Usher Raymond, and rap icon, Juicy J, we as a community have heard a disturbing message. The iconic duo, voiced their beliefs that it is morally proper for a woman to dance on a pole to support her lifestyle.

This is an alarming message we must address from an ethical perspective with a resistant stance. Did you know the average age of a young girl forced into sex trafficking is 12 to 14 years? Did you also know few young girls escape the harsh sting of sexual degradation?

We must face this unsettling reality. We must not leave our women subject to sexual customs of mainstream media, nor our mothers and sisters subject to degrading insults from unprincipled men and women.

Our women are the divine essence of God, fearfully and wonderfully made. The truth is that we can serve as agents of change. As men and women of valor, integrity and love, we have a voice to speak out against the objectification of women wherever we find it.

In closing, Usher unashamedly says, “I Don’t Mind.” With the same sense of fearlessness, we boldly say, “We Do Mind.” We do mind a woman dancing on a pole for money. We do mind a woman insulted by perversion.

WE DO MIND, therefore, we stand against Usher’s message.We are asking all radio stations to stop playing this degrading song immediately. We are asking all record stores, department stores, big box retail stores, and Internet companies to stop selling the song immediately. Stop, stop, stop! WE DO MIND!

(Pastor Whitlock is the spiritual leader of Christ Our Redeemer AME (COR) Church, the largest predominantly African-American church in Orange County with more than 2,900 multi-racial members. Mr. Lyles is a student at California State University - Fullerton.)

For the most part, Black rage exists submerged, but for poor Blacks, rage is barely below the surface, ready to explode with minimal provocation.Blacks, in varying degrees, tend to submerge feelings of rage, but even the more passive explode occasionally.Research about Black rage focuses largely on individuals, but the potential for overt group rage is just as important.

The 21st century began with a widespread, but absurd claim that America is a post-racial society.That mindset, the financial crisis, emergence of Tea Party conservatism, huge demographic shifts, all tend to obscure any serious consideration of Blacks’ discontent, or subdued rage.After all, don’t we have a Black president? Understanding the genesis and continuing reality of Black rage is crucial for developing sustainable alternatives to the second-class status of Black people in this country.

Today’s column revisits Black Rage (1968), co-authored by psychiatrists William H. Grier and Price M. Cobbs. It is an unsettling, exhaustive analysis of a closet issue embedded in Blacks’ psychological DNA.The book explores the origins and ramifications of Black rage that still beg illumination and are at the heart of unresolved psychological and social challenges.

The book begins, “What the hell do niggers want anyway?Every other ethnic group has made it up the ladder on its own.Why don’t Blacks do likewise?” America began building a case when Black men were first sold into bondage.It developed a way of life, an American ethos, and a national lifestyle which included the assumption that Blacks are inferior. Further, hatred of Blacks has been deeply tied to being an American.

“America is rich and powerful,in large measure, on the backs of Blacks. It has become a violent, pitiless nation, hard and calculating.With the passing of the need for Black laborers, Black people have become useless. They are a drag on the market.There are not enough menial jobs.The facts, however, are simple.Since the demise of slavery, Black people have been expendable in a cruel and impatient land.

The most idealistic social reformer of our time, Martin Luther King, Jr., was not slain by one man.His murderer grew out of that large body of violent bigotry America has always nurtured.To the extent that he stood in the way of bigotry, his life was in jeopardy, his saintly persuasion notwithstanding.

Black men have been so hurt in their manhood that they are now unsure and uneasy as they attempt to teach their sons to be men.They have stood so long in such peculiar jeopardy in America that a “Black norm” has developed a suspiciousness of one’s environment that is necessary for survival.

And Black professionals do not escape racial oppression.If these educated recipients of the white man’s bounty find it hard to control their rage, what of their less fortunate kinsmen who have less to protect, less to lose and more scars to show for their journey in this land?The tone (of the book) is mournful, painful and desolate as the psychological consequences of white oppression of Blacks are described.Centuries of senseless cruelty and the permeation of the Black man’s character with the conviction of his own hatefulness and inferiority is psychologically crippling and the book attempts to evoke a certain quality of depression and hopelessness in the reader and to stir these feelings.These are the most common feelings tasted by Black people in America.

But Black people have also had to develop a genius for surviving under the most deadly circumstances.They have survived because of their close attention to reality.A Black dreamer would have had a short life in Mississippi.And the preoccupation with religion has been a willing adoption of fantasy to prod an otherwise reluctant mind to face another day.The psychological devices used to survive are reminiscent of the years of slavery and this is no coincidence.Psychologically, Black men face substantially the same danger now as then.

We should ask what is likely to galvanize the masses into an effective response to psychological oppression.It could happen in any number of ways, but will it be by Blacks finally, and in an unpredictable way, simply fed up with the racism of this country?It will be fired not so much by any one incident as by the gradual accretion of stupidity into national policy.

One might consider the possibility that if the national direction remains unchanged, a requisite conflagration simply might not come about.Might not Black people remain where they are as they did for hundreds of years during slavery?

Such seems truly inconceivable, not because Blacks are so naturally warlike or rebellious, but because they are filled with such grief, such sorrow, such bitterness and such hatred.No matter what repressive measures are invoked against Blacks, ultimately they will never swallow their rage and go back to blind hopelessness.There are no more psychological tricks Blacks can play on themselves to make it possible to exist in dreadful circumstances.No more lies can they tell themselves.No more dreams to fix on.No more opiates to dull the pain.No more patience.No more thought.No more reason.”

Black rage remains a submerged reality. Therefore, concerned folks must work together so that the book’s disturbing, but redemptive, analysis is manifested in new mindsets and strategies that ensure, for us, a more secure and prosperous future.

This year 6255 (2015) finds us once again observing National Black HIV/AIDS Awareness Day, which occurring on February 7th, takes place also in the context of Black History Month I, a time of deep and extended remembrance, reflection and recommitment. Let us, then, pause to pour libation in rightful and deserved remembrance of our relatives, friends, neighbors and fellow workers who lost their lives due to this horrible and deadly disease, HIV/AIDS. Let us also reflect on how we can aid the living who are well to avoid it and those who are ill to restrain and overcome it. And let us recommit ourselves to continue the work and struggle still before us to triumph over this scourge.

This year’s theme is “I am my sister’s and brother’s keeper”. It is an ethical assertion which commits us, as the Hebrew word for “to keep”, shamar, suggests, to guard, protect and preserve each other. An ancient Egyptian word for this ethical obligation is saw (sa-u) with a similar range of meanings including—guard, protect, preserve, attend to and watch over. Within the meaning of the concept of being our sisters’ and brothers’ keeper, then, is being responsible for them and, of necessity, responsive to them. For only by being responsive to them can we be responsible for and to them.

Moreover, to say we are our sisters’ and brothers’ keepers is to say we see them as relatives, indeed primary relatives and this implies we are and must act as one large inclusive family. And this family we also call community whether we speak of it in local, national or international terms, i.e., in pan-African terms. Thus, our approach to the HIV/AIDS crisis must be to engage it as a family affair, a problem, challenge and way forward for our family. And if it is to be real and relevant, ethical and effective, then we must see and assert ourselves as sources of service, support and sanctuary in this vital and ultimately victorious struggle.

We must begin, as always, in service, giving ourselves in work and good done for those who need and deserve it. For at the heart of all our morality is the respectful treatment of every human being as a bearer of dignity and divinity, and compassion and care for the vulnerable, i.e., the most easily injured, the poor, powerless and the ill, the stranger, prisoner, and the different. And if this is our duty to any other humans, what more do we owe our brothers and sisters? Let us do then the essential things: visit and assist them, talk with and counsel them for the good and against avoidable self-injury and always to get the test, tell the truth and take the medicine. It is carrying out our obligations as fellow brothers and sisters, giving a portion of ourselves to the practice and process of meeting the needs of our community and its members to heal and repair themselves, to prevent and reduce harm to themselves, and to live lives of good and promise.

To be sources of support means joining in the social and political struggle to secure justice for our brothers and sisters, to reduce and end disparities and the inequities that cause and sustain them. It requires building support structures for education, mobilization, organization, confrontation and transformation. Indeed, it means teaching our people the knowledge necessary to protect and preserve themselves, avoid harm to others, secure access to tests, medicines, treatment, care and all services available. It calls for mobilizing and organizing our people into a self-conscious social force for turning this thing around; saving and sustaining our lives; acquiring and using the resources available and needed; building adequately funded culturally competent programs and projects; and confronting the system and ourselves in ways that yield the results we want, work for and deserve. And it means creating together the capacities and conditions for self and social transformation, leading to dignity-affirming, life-preserving and life-enhancing thinking and practices which move us beyond the tragedy expressed in being 12% of the population; 44% ofnew AIDS infections; 43% of those living with AIDS; and 48% of those dying from AIDS.

To be a source of sanctuary for our sisters and brothers is to provide for them safe, secure, caring, peaceful and reaffirming spaces free from stigma, harassment, violence, apprehension and fear. It means not only establishing physical space to provide these conditions, but also contextual space wherever we are by confronting, denouncing and ending stigma, discrimination, isolation and acts and words of hate, harassment and degradation. This means also moving our family, community and people beyond narrow and negative notions of human differences, of manhood and womanhood, of sex, sexuality, humanity itself and worthiness of respect, love, care and loving kindness.

Indeed, we are again, in a real sense, standing outside the gates of the city of Memphis (Men-nefer) in ancient Egypt with Pharaoh Piankhi, confronting a life-and-death situation. Like Piankhi, we must assume and move forward on the fundamental assumption and faith that we, like our Egyptian ancestors, have within ourselves the sources of our own salvation, the internal capacity and will of men and women to choose life over death and bring about a new day and way forward for themselves and our family. Thus, outside the walls of Memphis, Piankhi sent a message to the people of the city relevant for our times, saying “Behold two ways are before you (i.e., life and death), you may choose as you wish. Open up and you will live; close down and you will die”. And he urges them to choose life over death saying, “Do not bar the gates of your life. Do not desire death and reject life”. On the contrary, the people again are urged to choose life, open up to new ways of thinking, feeling, speaking and acting and build together the good life, city and society they all deserved.

So, as we say in Kawaida, there are signs here for those who want to see, lessons for those who want to learn and a path forward for those who want to pursue it. In this teaching, our ancestors clearly call on us to choose life, reject death and do what is necessary to protect and preserve our lives and build a good life for ourselves and future generations. And this means taking primary responsibility for the lives we live, waging struggle internally and externally for the good, and seeing ourselves as ill and injured physicians who must heal and rebuild ourselves in the process and practice of repairing and rebuilding the world. And to do this, we must open our hearts and minds to feelings, thoughts and practices that rightfully anchor, enlighten and elevate us, and make us gladly willing to become a constant and unwavering source of service, support and sanctuary for each other in illness, sorrow and suffering, and in the ongoing struggle to achieve a good life of health, happiness, well-being and wholeness.

Part II. In the midst of this rising tide of resistance, it is important to situate it and understand it in the context of our history of struggle and the culture of struggle that has been built on the battlefield of centuries of righteous and relentless resistance by African people in this country.Indeed, since we landed here in chains, we have fought to defend and secure our right to be free, to have justice, and to live a life of dignity, decency and self-determined good. And the struggle we waged benefitted not only us, but all other oppressed and marginalized groups and peoples and expanded the realm of freedom and justice in this country.

Indeed, it is not an immodest assertion or an exaggerated claim to affirm that no tradition of struggle has been more decisive than that of our people in expanding the realm of freedom and justice in this country. Even given its obviously unfinished and still oppressive form and functioning, we have, with allies and other progressive forces,created through righteous and relentless struggle an America which its White enslaving founders could not imagine, let alone accept.

Thus, let us not naively claim that we can learn nothing or need nothing from our past. Rather let us follow our ancestral teachings that instruct us that our obligation is no less than this: to know our past and honor it; to engage the present and improve it; and to imagine a whole new future and to forge it in the most ethical, effective and expansive ways. Let us learn, then, the lessons of resilience, resourcefulness and sustainment in life and struggle from our own history, our own experience as persons and a people.For as Malcolm X taught us, “of all our studies history is best qualified to reward our research”. And in these studies, let us be mindful that the essential and indispensable text we must always read is the book of our own lives as persons and a people.

Let us then read the record of struggle of our people as they passed through fire and freezing waters, ate ice for water and leaves for bread, weathered seasons of savage times of oppression and were not dispirited, diverted or defeated. And let us learn then not only from reading library or e-books, but also from exchanging with those living and still standing out front and struggling and whose wisdom, experience and caring and continuing commitment merit and compel it. And let us also learn from those who have stepped to the side, but are still involved; and those who have always been on the side, unannounced and often undercover, but provide a vital source for intelligence, legal support, monies, materials and skilled personnel on behalf of our people and our struggle.

Moreover, in our constant and continuous move forward and the building of our Movement, we must be rightfully attentive to the building of solidarities across lines of class, gender, generation, sexuality, age and other social and biological identities to form a strong united front in our righteous struggle against our oppression as a people. This united front, as we have learned and advocated over the years, must be based on operational unity, unity in diversity, unity without uniformity, unity that does not deny or disrespect difference, but builds on commonalities. Indeed, it must be a principled and purposeful unity framed in discussion, forged in struggle and made real in the rich, varied and valuable relationships we build in the midst of common ground interests, work and struggle. In other words, the unity we must seek is one which builds and strengthens community, a community not divided by diversity, but united in diversity, standing together on common ground of our peoplehood, shared interests and shared aspirations to be ourselves and free ourselves, not only from police violence, but also from all forms of oppression and constraints on human freedom and flourishing.

Also, we must constantly renew and expand our ranks with new persons—young, middle aged, and elderly, but especially young people. This is necessary not only because they must and will carry on the struggle when those older no longer can or are no longer present. It is also necessary for transmission of the tradition of struggle, concepts and practices of leadership, knowledge, skills, and experience. Moreover, it produces the vital context and consciousness for ongoing intergenerational discussion and intergenerational solidarity; timely transfer of positions of leadership and relational networks built over time by older leaders. But if this intergenerational solidarity is to be built and sustained, it must be based on the principles and practices of: mutual respect; receptivity to each other’s interests and concerns; reciprocity; mutual caring for each other; shared discussion and decision-making; relational protocols; and shared commitments to our people and their ongoing struggle to free themselves, be themselves and flourish.

Finally, we must constantly push the battlelines and lives of our people forward. In a word, we must continously advance the struggle and the interests of our people, always striving to improve, to discover new grounds on which to define, defend and advance their interests. And as Amilcar Cabral taught us, we must build community and build the people as we fight, turning our weaknesses into strengths and increasing our strength and capacity to struggle and build the good world we all want and deserve.Moreover, as Mary McLeod Bethune taught us, we must keep the faith of our foreparents who are models and mirrors for us in all our struggles and strivings, and who were not dispirited, diverted or defeated. As she says, “our forefathers (and mothers) struggled for liberty in conditions far more onerous than those we now face, but they never lost faith. We must never forget their suffering and their sacrifices, for they were the foundations of the progress of our people”.

Again, at the heart and center of all we do must be our active commitment to our people, especially the masses of our people, always with due and rightful consideration of others and the well-being of the world. Still the ancient African ethical imperative applies: serve the people.Thus, our moral instructions and the lessons of history teach us that the struggle rises and flourishes or declines and disappears depending on how well we root ourselves in the masses of our people and aid them in becoming self-conscious agents of their own lives and liberation. Therefore, Kawaida teaches, go to the masses, work with them, learn from them, share with them our knowledge and skills, help them develop their own strengths; join them in their daily strivings to improve and push their lives forward, and stand with them in active solidarity on their many battlefields for a dignity-respecting and radically transformed society and world.

In California, the talk among K-12 public school parents and concerned others is about more money being available for school districts, accountability for improving educational outcomes for the lowest achieving students and Common Core. (There is no mandatory plan to prepare low- achieving students for the more rigorous Common Core standards.Without such preparation, Common Core will likely harm, not benefit these students.)

Efforts to improve the performance of Black students and other low-achieving students have been basically experimental.(The Los Angeles Unified School District’s (LAUSD) efforts lacked sufficient leadership, political will and adequate resources. In other words, they were not and could not be successful.)

Last year, Education Secretary Arne Duncan denounced the inequities in America’s schools cited in the U.S. Department of Education survey “Data Collection”.He said, “The inequities are socially divisive, educationally unsound, morally bankrupt and economically self-destructive……which must compel us to act.”This is an apt description of continuing race-based disparities in the schools but neither Duncan nor the report elaborated on the reasons for the stark disparities between Black students and almost all other students. The fundamental reason is racism.

One of the survey’s findings should surprise even hardened education pundits: Most of the nation’s schools offer only part-time pre-school programs.Although Black students account less than one-fifth of those in pre-school, they make up almost half of students suspended from pre-school multiple times!

The race-based derivation of disparities in educational outcomes are known but rarely given proper weight. Research on these disparities confirms the obvious but does not address sustainable solutions. Parents, educators and concerned others should insist that to be of value,education research must take into account causal factors. Currently, factors reflecting race-based inequities in schools include the following:Black students nationwide are expelled at triple the rate of their white peers; five-percent of whites were suspended compared to 16% of Black student; Black girls are suspended at the rate of twelve-percent—far greater than girls of any other race or ethnicity and students of color have less access to experienced teachers.Most of these students are stuck in schools that have the most new teachers and countless Black students attend schools where as many as twenty-percent of the teachers do not meet license or certification requirements and one in four school districts pay teachers in mostly white high schools $5000 more than teachers in schools with higher Black and Latino enrollment.

Obviously, such discrimination lowers academic performance for students of color, especially Blacks, putting them at greater risk of becoming dropouts.Recent research also shows the failure of decades of legal and political efforts to ensure equal rights in education for minority students.Brown v. Board of Education banned school segregation and affirmed the right to quality education for all children; the Civil Rights Act guaranteed equal access to education.However, neither has lived up to its promise.

The policy director for K-12 at the Education Trust said the Data Collection survey confirmed that students of color get less than their fair share of in-school resources relevant for high achievement.“Students of color get less access to high-level courses.Black students in particular get less instructional time because they are far more likely to receive suspensions or expulsions.”Although 16% of America’s public school students are Black, they represent 27% of students referred by schools to law enforcement and 31% of students arrested for an offense committed in school.

The following are current initiatives to improve educational outcomes but do not appear to address well- known race-based inequities: Common Core standards, the Local Control Funding Formula (LCFF) and My Brother’s Keeper are still in first stage implementation.Common Core is a nationwide initiative to standardize curriculum and instruction in mathematics and language arts.In a previous column, I described Common Core as both a challenge and promise, i.e., unless Black students receive proper focus and equitable resources, Common Core could actually widen, not eliminate or reduce the achievement gap.

My Brother’s Keeper is President Obama’s initiative that focuses on young Black men and boys, but also includes Latinos and Asians. This is fine if funding and other resources are equitable, not equal. Equalmeans Black students receive the same amount of funding as all others. Since their needs are usually greater than other students’, funding must be adequate for their needs.

LCFF is a California initiative that enables schools districts, rather than the state, to allocate funds to schools most in need.Again, the concern is equity—school boards must allocate funds so that schools most in need actually receive sufficient funds to meet those needs.(Schools with a substantial Black student population in LAUSD are, without question, among those most in need and Black parents and local school communities must demand equitable funding and other resources for those schools.)

Given race-based inequities, solutions must be tied to the needs of Black students especially, because they are the most victimized. Also, keep in mind, solutions are even more difficult because public education in this country was not designed to address their needs. The Black community and its leadership must work collaboratively, with allies, to exert sustainable pressure for new policies and practices that actually improve the quality of education for Black students.This is a daunting but inescapable challenge.

Demands to stop police abuse in the Black community have been voiced for as long as anyone can remember.However, the recent rash of police killing and murdering young Black men, especially, has brought national attention to the problem. Have things really changed? The following two examples, years apart, suggest they have not.

Last weekend, Congresswoman Karen Bass held a Town Hall on President Obama’s “21st Century Task Force on Policing” at a packed Ward AME Church in Los Angeles.Task Force member Attorney Connie Rice and Assemblyman Reginald Jones-Sawyer, Chair of the California Legislative Black Caucus faced a barrage of concerns, complaints and demands that something be done to stop police abuse againstBlack and Brown youth.

Attorney Rice is a staunch supporter of the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) and its top cop, ”Charlie Beck is the best chief of police Los Angeles has ever had.”Rice urged the audience to acknowledge LAPD’s progress in police-community relations.Joan Sawyer pledged the Legislative Black Caucus will sponsor legislation to increase police transparency and accountability.

There were repeated demands for an elected civilian police review board and that investigation of allegations of police abuse be handled at the state level, not by the district attorney.Some commented on the need to understand the continuing imprint of racism and white privilege on police abuse.New criteria for training police officers was stressed, as was concern over the increased militarization of LAPD.And there was a shared perception that current policy gives police a license to kill.

Speakers urged Rice to present the concerns and demands from the town hall to the President’s Task Force on Policing.Representative Bass and Jones sawyer agreed to work together on legislation to change policy (federal and state) that provides virtual immunity to police charged with abuse, including homicide.

The following op-ed (August 21, 1991), “The Need for A Civilian Police Review Board in LA” by Michael Zinzun is similar, not only to the concerns and demands at the town hall, but to the continuing race-based policy and police abuse that is now driving protests and demands for justice throughout America. Will this be sustained?

“While City Hall juggles for power and faces changes on the Police Commission, the people are mobilizing for community control of the police.At a kickoff rally, the Committee for Justice and a Civilian Police Review Board launched its signature gathering ballot campaign for an elected civilian review board in the city of Los Angeles.Participants came from every corner of the city to organize and raise money for this campaign.

The recent police killing of an unarmed Chicano youth in East LA was no “aberration” any more than was the assault on Rodney King last March.

Shootings, beatings, racial slurs, stun guns, battering rams, Operation Hammer and sexual abuse of lesbians and gays, police dog attacks, evidence of tampering, attacks on union strikers, spying on political activists, human and civil rights violations, KKK organizing inside police precincts—these are daily occurrences throughout Los Angeles.This is especially true in Black, Chicano/Latino, Native American and Immigrant and gay communities.An elected civilian review board, independent of the police and the politicians will be a giant step in putting a stop to these police-state style actions.

The Christopher Commission exposed appalling abuses, but this was not news to legions of police abuse victims in this city.Our review board ballot proposal, the strongest in the nation, comes from the community.It requires much more than the Christopher Commission was willing to recommend.

This Review Board will be elected, not appointed.It will have an elected “special prosecutor” and hired staff, independent of LAPD, the City Attorney and City Council, with full subpoena power and access to shooting sites.The Review Board will have the power to examine complaints of police abuse and impose penalties that include suspension and firing, as well as the power to review and change LAPD policies and procedures. To ensure ongoing community control of the Review Board, among other requirements, each board member will be required to hold monthly community meetings.This City Charter Amendment also protects whistle-blowers inside LAPD from punitive action and harassment.

The Committee knows that a civilian review board cannot eliminate police abuse, any more than it can resolve the underlying conditions of poverty, racism, crumbling health and education, drug addiction and joblessness. But it will make it a lot harder for LAPD to get away with acts of violence and abuse.Community control of the police is a first step to community control over our lives.

We also know that civilian control of the police is desperately needed outside of the city of Los Angeles.The example we set here will be contagious!Winning a genuine review board in LA will pave the way for gaining the same control throughout LA County and across the nation.”

Michael Zinzun was co-chair of the Committee for A Civilian Review Board.He won a judgment against the Pasadena Police Department for excessive use of force in an altercation that left him blind in one eye andwon a lawsuit against LAPD Assistant Chief Robert Vernon who, during Zinzun’s campaign for the City Council in Pasadena, made it appear Zinzun was linked to terrorist groups.

“If you want to be important—wonderful. If you want to be recognized—wonderful. If you want to be great—wonderful. But recognize that he who is greatest among you shall be your servant. That’s a new definition of greatness. And this morning, the thing that I like about it: by giving that definition of greatness, it means that everybody can be great, because everybody can serve. You don’t have to have a college degree to serve. You don’t have to make your subject and your verb agree to serve. You don’t have to know about Plato and Aristotle to serve. You don’t have to know Einstein’s theory of relativity to serve. You don’t have to know the second theory of thermodynamics in physics to serve. You only need a heart full of grace, a soul generated by love.”

These well-known words are from Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.’s sermon “The Drum Major Instinct,” delivered at Ebenezer Baptist Church on February 4, 1968. He was explaining that we all start out with the ingrained instinct to be “drum majors” – everyone wants to be important, to be first, to lead the parade. Watch a group of children try to form a line and right away you’ll see this instinct in action. But Dr. King said too many people never outgrow this instinct and by constantly struggling to be the most powerful or famous or wealthiest or best-educated, we forget one of the Gospels’ and life’s largest truths: the real path to greatness is through service.

This is one of the key lessons we should teach our children about Dr. King. Many of them have just studied Dr. King in school in the days leading up to his birthday, and many have learned to see him as a history book hero, a larger-than-life, mythical figure. But it’s crucial for them to understand Dr. King wasn’t a superhuman with magical powers. Just as the extraordinary new movie Selma is reminding a new generation of filmgoers, our children need to be reminded that Dr. King was a real person – just like all of the other ministers, parents, teachers, neighbors, and other familiar adults in their lives today.

I first heard Dr. King speak in person at a Spelman College chapel service during my senior year in college. Dr. King was just 31 but he had already gained a national reputation during the successful Montgomery Bus Boycott five years earlier. He became a mentor and friend. Although I do remember him as a great leader and a hero, I also remember him as someone able to admit how often he was afraid and unsure about his next step. But faith prevailed over fear, uncertainty, fatigue, and sometimes depression. It was his human vulnerability and ability to rise above it that I most remember. “If I Can Help Somebody Along the Way” was his favorite song. He was an ordinary man who made history because he was willing to stand up and serve and make a difference in extraordinary ways as did the legions of other civil rights warriors in the 1950s and 1960s. We need to teach our children every day that they can and must make a difference. too. “Everybody can be great, because everybody can serve.”

Towards the end of “The Drum Major Instinct,” Dr. King told the congregation he sometimes thought about his own death and funeral. He said when that day came he didn’t want people to talk about his Nobel Peace Prize or his degrees or hundreds of awards: “I’d like somebody to mention that day that Martin Luther King, Jr., tried to give his life serving others. I’d like for somebody to say that day that Martin Luther King, Jr., tried to love

somebody. I want you to say that day that I tried to be right on the war question. I want you to be able to say that day that I did try to feed the hungry. And I want you to be able to say that day that I did try in my life to clothe those who were naked. I want you to say on that day that I did try in my life to visit those who were in prison. I want you to say that I tried to love and serve humanity. Yes, if you want to say that I was a drum major, say that I was a drum major for justice. Say that I was a drum major for peace. I was a drum major for righteousness. And all of the other shallow things will not matter. I won’t have any money to leave behind. I won’t have the fine and luxurious things of life to leave behind. But I just want to leave a committed life behind.”

Marian Wright Edelman is president of the Children’s Defense Fund whose Leave No Child Behind® mission is to ensure every child a Healthy Start, a Head Start, a Fair Start, a Safe Start and a Moral Start in life and successful passage to adulthood with the help of caring families and communities. For more information go to www.childrensdefense.org.

One could not help but be impressed by the millions that turned out in Paris to stand against the Islamist terrorists who killed workers at the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo and four others at a kosher grocery store. Two law enforcement officers were also killed, bringing the total to 17.

About 40 heads of state and more than a million others crowded into Republique Square; even more rallied around France. In total, it is estimated that 3.7 rallied for freedom. They wore shirts and carried signs that said, “I am Charlie.” Some said, “I am Muslim and Charlie” or “I am Jewish and Charlie.” Those crowds transcended race, religious and political lines.

President Obama got mixed reaction to his not attending the solidarity rally. Ambassador to France Jane Hartley, someone with much less status, represented the United States. Critics said the president could at least have sent Vice President Joe Biden; Attorney General Eric H. Holder was in Paris and could have attended. The president may be doing something much more substantive by convening a summit on world terrorism at the White House in February.

I wonder if these gatherings will address terror in Nigeria, where the Islamic terrorist group Boko Haram abducted 276 girls, and still holds 219. A hashtag campaign, #BringBackOurGirls was joined by First Lady Michelle Obama, former Secretary of State Hilary Clinton, British Prime Minister David Cameron and others. Few of the 40 who rallied in Paris have ever mentioned the abducted girls and those terrorists who took them. Indeed, the abducted girls have all but disappeared from the headlines and from the public consciousness.

The girls were abducted on April 14, 2014. Since then, our attention has been riveted by other news from the African continent, as the Ebola virus killed thousands (we in the U.S. were mostly focused on our handful of casualties), and as ISIS has escalated its activity around the globe. While some have forgotten about the Nigerian girls, many have not. Obiageli Ezekwesili, a former Nigerian government official who is now vice president of the World Bank’s Africa Division, has been among those continuing to focus attention on the girls.

People fear that Boko Haram may have sold the schoolgirls into slavery, forced some into marriage, or killed others. Given the fact that Amnesty International, the International Committee of the Red Cross, and the UN Security Council have decried the Islamist militant terrorist group, it is alarming that the world community has been so indifferent to the plight of the abducted young girls. Some of the indifference does not start with the world, but in Nigeria. Will Goodluck Jonathan, the Nigerian president who is running for reelection, mention the girls at all before February, when voting takes place? Or, has the fate of 219 kidnapped girls been forgotten?

Demonstrations have taken place daily in Abuja, Nigeria’s capital, despite the fact that the police have ordered these demonstrations to stop. Meanwhile, Boko Haram continues its terrorist plundering in Nigeria, destroying villages and towns in the northeast part of the country and killing thousands. It is estimated that they have destroyed more than 3,700 structures – homes, churches, and public spaces. Tens of thousands of Nigerians have fled to bordering Chad because they fear for their lives.

I don’t know if it would be effective for world leaders to rally in Abuja to pressure Boko Haram to return the girls. I don’t know if T-shirts or signs saying, “We Are the Nigerian Girls” would do much more than direct attention back to these young students whose hopes and dreams have been stomped on by irrational terrorists. I don’t know if it would make a difference if Nigerians all over the world came together to demand return of the girls. I don’t know the efforts of feminists around the world would make a difference.

I do know that about 219 Nigerian girls are gone, and a terrorist group is responsible for taking them. I know that they are reputed to be affiliated with Al-Qaeda and with ISIS. I know that while the world has rallied to show solidarity in the fight against terrorism in France, there has been no such gathering to show solidarity in the fight against terrorism in Nigeria. I don’t know (and I might be misinformed) if offers to help contain or eliminate Boko Haram have been made by the world community.

The war against terrorism has been embraced in Paris, with millions there, and thousands in the rest of the world, taking it to the streets to express their outrage. Where is the outrage for the more than 200 Nigerian girls? Nine months after they have been snatched from their school, who remembers? Who cares?

Few things irk me more than hearing someone say or imply that now that we have a Black president, perhaps the time has come to abolish Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs). I have zero tolerance for such ignorance.

HBCUs are being held to a different standard than other universities that target certain communities. Because Jews and Catholics were refused admission or subjected to quotas at major universities, they established their own institutions. That’s why we have the University of Notre Dame in South Bend, Ind., the College of the Holly Cross in Worcester, Mass. and the Catholic University of America in Washington, D.C. for Catholics.

Brandeis University in Waltham, Mass. says on its website that it was “founded in 1948 by members of the American Jewish community.” Like HBCUS, these schools did not restrict enrollment to Catholics or Jews. HBCUs have always welcomed White students and faculty members on campus.

The belief that we should pay our respect, have a proper funeral and send our Black colleges off to a graveyard for relics simply because Barack Obama is president is preposterous. In 1960, John F. Kennedy was elected president amid questions of whether America was ready to elect its first Catholic president.

JFK won but no one declared that it ushered in an era of post-religious bigotry. No one said, “Now that we have elected a Catholic as president, Notre Dame and Holly Cross have outlived their usefulness.” If universities established because of religious bigotry have not outlived their usefulness, why should HBCUs be put out to pasture?

There are 106 accredited HBCUs, 47 of them public. According the White House Initiative on HBCUs, Black colleges award more than 35,000 degrees each year. In Mississippi, HBCUs handed out 37 percent of the degrees awarded to African Americans in the state, followed by Louisiana (36 percent), North Carolina (34 percent), Arkansas (31 percent), Maryland (25 percent) Alabama and South Carolina (23 percent each), Tennessee (19 percent), Georgia (18 percent), Texas (13 percent) and Florida (9 percent).

As Secretary of Education Arne Duncan said in a speech last September, “Too many Americans are unfamiliar with the staggering accomplishments of HBCUs. Most of America’s civil rights giants were educated at HBCUs – Dr. King, W.E.B. DuBois, Rosa Parks, Booker T. Washington, and Thurgood Marshall.

“Yet what is most impressive about the HBCU record is not just your famous alumni. It is that HBCUs, working with meager resources, almost single-handedly created an African-American professional class in the face of decades of Jim Crow discrimination.”

Duncan continued, “Even, more than a half-century after the demise of Jim Crow laws, HBCUs continue to have an outsized impact in educating Black professionals. We have over 7,000 institutions of higher education across the country, 106 of which are HBCUs. But in 2010, HBCUs still awarded a sixth of all bachelor degrees and professional degrees earned by African Americans in the U.S.”

At a time, when its projected that we won’t have enough college graduates to meet our future needs, it would be foolhardy to diminish a pool of institutions that have proven their value over the years.

While the Obama administration is saying the right things, HBCUs are approaching death by a thousand cuts.

Pell grants were reduced by Congress in 2011, making students eligible for 12 semesters instead of 18. That will hurt Black students who, on average, take longer to complete their undergraduate education.

Without consulting HBCUs, the Obama administration made changes in the Parent PLUS loans three years ago that made it more difficult for parents with less than stellar credit to obtain a loan. By some estimates, that change, which has since been modified, caused up to 20 percent drop in enrollment at HBCUs.

And now the proposal for the federal government to pay for the first two years of community college, a move that is certain to harm HBCUs. It would have been better to offer to pick up the tab for the first two years at any public university.

Some Black college presidents are reluctant to criticize the proposal publicly for fear of falling in disfavor with the White House. The head of some higher ed organization are carefully picking their words because they represent community colleges as well as HBCUs. And some people are hiding behind the time-worn excuse, “the devil is in the details.” In this case, the community college proposal represents the devil for the continued existence of HBCUs. And because we have our first Black president or have other conflict of interests, not too many people have the temerity to say it.

As one educator told me privately, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. must be rolling over in his grave.

George E. Curry, former editor-in-chief of Emerge magazine, is editor-in-chief of the National Newspaper Publishers Association News Service (NNPA.) He is a keynote speaker, moderator, and media coach. Curry can be reached through his Web site, www.georgecurry.com. You can also follow him at www.twitter.com/currygeorge and George E. Curry Fan Page on Facebook.

Music, songs, videos and lyrics that emanate from the Black experience continues to awaken the consciousness of millions of people around the world. The recent collaboration between iconic artists Common and John Legend on theme song for the movie “Selma” is a prime example.

As the two Chicago natives demonstrated, our culture is rich with historical and contemporary accomplishments of artists who have been able to emotionally connect art with the long struggle for Black freedom, justice and equality.

Of course, the Selma-to-Montgomery, Ala. March was part of that struggle. In a few weeks, we will witness the 50th anniversary of that march, which was led by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. It was the dramatic event that led to passage of the 1965 Voting Rights Act. The release of the docudrama film “Selma” could not have been scheduled at a better time.

“Selma” was directed by the talented and gifted Ava DuVernay and produced by Oprah Winfrey, Christian Colson, Dede Gardner and Jeremy Kleiner. Oprah Winfrey she be applauded for using her considerable financial resources to support such an important undertaking.

Hands to the Heavens, no man, no weapon

Formed against, yes glory is destined

Every day women and men become legends

Sins that go against our skin become blessings

The movement is a rhythm to us

Freedom is like religion to us

Justice is juxtaposition in us

Justice for all just ain’t specific enough

One son died, his spirit is revisitin’ us

True and living living in us, resistance is us

That’s why Rosa sat on the bus

That’s why we walked through Ferguson with our hands up

When it go down we woman and man up

They say, “Stay down” and we stand up

Shots, we on the ground, the camera panned up

King pointed to the mountain top and we ran up

Although the movie was nominated for the Golden Globe Award for Best Motion Picture, it actually won the Golden Globe Award for Best Original Song, “Glory,” produced by Common and John Legend. They stood together on the stage at the Golden Globe Awards to receive that much-deserved tribute. It’s another example of Hip-hop and pop culture combining to make a real difference on the global stage.

“Glory” is appropriately named. There was a certain transcendent glory that occurred in the final aftermath of March 3, 1965, known as “Bloody Sunday,” atop the Edmund Pettus Bridge. Thanks to television, the entire world witnessed Hosea Williams, John Lewis and other peaceful marchers being mercilessly beaten by law enforcement officials for exercising their constitutional rights.

Both the movie and theme song capture that bravery of that era.

“Glory” just won the Critic’s Choice Award for Best Original Song. In his acceptance remarks, Common said, “Thank you Ava DuVernay, for making the first feature film about Dr. King so beautifully….. We knew the spirit and intention of ‘Selma,’ and of what Dr. King is about. That’s love, that’s justice, that’s freedom. For all people. We created ‘Glory’ in that spirit.”

Now the war is not over

Victory isn’t won

And we’ll fight on to the finish

Then when it’s all done

We’ll cry glory, oh glory

We’ll cry glory, oh glory

Selma is now for every man, woman and child

Even Jesus got his crown in front of a crowd

They marched with the torch, we gon’ run with it now

Never look back, we done gone hundreds of miles

From dark roads he rose, to become a hero

Facin’ the league of justice, his power was the people

Enemy is lethal, a king became regal

Saw the face of Jim Crow under a bald eagle

The biggest weapon is to stay peaceful

We sing, our music is the cuts that we bleed through

Somewhere in the dream we had an epiphany

Now we right the wrongs in history

No one can win the war individually

It takes the wisdom of the elders and young people’s energy

Welcome to the story we call victory

The coming of the Lord, my eyes have seen the glory

When the war is done, when it’s all said and done

We’ll cry glory, oh glory

Benjamin F. Chavis, Jr. is the President and CEO of the National Newspaper Publishers Association (NNPA) and can be reached for national advertisement sales and partnership proposals at: dr.bchavis@nnpa.org; and for lectures and other professional consultations at: http://drbenjaminfchavisjr.wix.com/drbfc

The bogus claim that America is a post-racial society is fueled not only by conservatives, but liberals as well.(A post-racial America was one of Barack Obama’s campaign themes.)This hybrid collective is made up of ideological opponents, i.e., extreme right wingconservatives, ambivalent liberals and so-called progressives.Unfortunately, many Blacks also embrace the post-racial rhetoric, albeit for vastly different reasons.

White leadership downplays the primacy of race, but maintains race-based power under the mythical guise of America as a melting pot. For many Blacks, minimizing race is part of a misguided attempt to assimilate.They don’t seem to understand on the color continuum, the closer to white, “the better you are,”, which means attempting to assimilate is an exercises in futility.Race remains America’s top priority- post-racial rhetoric to the contrary notwithstanding.

The late law professor, Derrick Bell’s penetrating analysis is a primer on the implications of the continuing significance of race and white privilege.His observations shed light on some seldom discussed aspects of the complex issue.Bell argued that racism is so ingrained in American life that no matter what Blacks do to better their lives they will not succeed as long as the majority of whites do not see their own well- being threatened by the status quo. However, he also reminded us that Blacks in bondage managed to retain their humanity and faith that pain and suffering were not the extent of their destiny.

Bell stressed America’s veiled dogma of race-based progress fails those who have been most marginalized:Blacks, the poor and others whom the myth ignores who must call for national action that actually incorporates their life experiences. He maintained they must find inspiration in the lives of oppressed people who defied death as slaves and freed men, insisting on their humanity despite society’s consensus that they were an inferior people.Bell passionately argued that Blacks can only de-legitimize racism “by accurately pinpointing it as the center, not the periphery in not only their lives, but the lives of whites and all others.”

He asserted Blacks must first recognize and acknowledge (at least to themselves) that their actions are not likely to lead to an immediate or transcendent change.And he said only then can that realization lead to public policy less likely to worsen their condition and more likely to remind the nation that they are determined to constantly challenge its power.

Professor Adolph Reed also provides provocative thinking regarding issues like the need for greater unity in combating racism and racist policies, especially because of the devolving state of the Black community.He argues a Black cohesive collective is a myth, necessary after the Civil War to present a semblance of unity.He says the leadership class defined specific Black interests, named themselves leaders and was assumed to be so by whites, a phenomenon that still exists.

According to Reed, egalitarianism appealed to both the civil rights movement and capitalists because it raised no hard questions about capitalism. Rather, it stressed the immorality of racism and segregation and how they were obstacles to economic progress.But Black opposition was integrated into the system in a way that strengthened, not challenged it.Reed’s remedies for improving Black life include: Breaking Black elites’ control over the ideas and political and economic priorities in the Black community; critiquing so-called Black agendas in order to transcend Black leaders serving their own interests exclusively; encouraging and supporting the diverse interests in Black communities.

Dr. Cornel West’s Nihilism in Black America is a corollary to his seminal essay, RaceMatters.In it he argues that Blacks initially struggled against racism in the enslaved circumstances of a new world and that (apart from racism), the major enemy of Black survival in America is a loss of hope and absence of meaning in their lives.West maintains “the genius of Blacks’ forbearers was to create a powerful buffer to counter the demons of helplessness, meaninglessness and lovelessness.”And he says, “Black people have always been in America’s wilderness in search of a promised land……..but many Blacks now reside in a jungle with a cutthroat mentality devoid of any faith in deliverance or hope.”

These three scholars forcefully articulate the need for Blacks to debunk the internalized, debilitating myths that race and white privilege are no longer significant factors in their lives.They are part of a dwindling vanguard of intellectuals who focus on substantive and sustainable issues and solutions in the Black community.

Black unity is at the heart of all efforts to recapture the core values and strength of our forbearers.Despite society’s denial, Blacks must acknowledge the significance of race and shed the twin burdens of victimization and futile dependency on others. Of course, this will requirerenewed commitment and courage, both are critical for challenging the magnitude of problemsfacing our people.

Minimizing race reinforces white privilege and Black people must no longer do that. Real change, however, will require a new mindset and struggle every day to regain the courage and self-reliance crucial not only for progress, but our very survival.

To refresh our memories of ourselves at our best, to recommit ourselves to principles and practices that demand and draw from us the excellent, uplifting and enduring, and to rebuild our Liberation Movement and go forth to repair and renew ourselves and the world, we must reaffirm and reconstruct our culture as a culture of struggle. By a culture of struggle, I mean a culture founded and formed in struggle by a people who understand and embrace struggle as a normal and necessary way of life. That is to say, they see and approach it as an indispensable way forward and upward, as a rightfully required way to break social and psychological chains, cross wrongfully restrictive boundaries, realize themselves fully, and bring good in the world.

It is a culture that understands and asserts with Frederick Douglass that “if there is no struggle there is no progress” and it’s a contradiction to “profess to favor freedom” and “deprecate agitation.” It is a culture that recovers and reaffirms Fannie Lou Hamer’s contention that “we must bring right and justice where there is wrong and injustice.” And that “Every step of the way you’ve got to fight.” And it is a culture that embraces and acts on A. Phillip Randolph’s assertion that “Freedom is never granted; it is won. Justice is never given; it is extracted.”

Here struggle is defined as righteous, rightful and ongoing striving on every level and in every area of life, as the Odu Ifa says, “to bring good in the world and not let any good be lost.” This is obviously and intentionally a moral conception of struggle rooted in the Maatian ethical teachings of our ancestors who perceived struggle as morally compelling, necessary and natural for human good and the well-being of the world.

It is morally compelling, because our ethical tradition obligates us to struggle against wrong, evil and injustice everywhere and bring good in the world. It is necessary, for without struggle, as noted above; there can be no real or righteous progress. And it is natural, because it is in the interest of human freedom and human life. For we are born in freedom and it is unnatural to be unfree and likewise, it is natural to struggle to recover freedom when and where it is denied, and to struggle to expand it in dignity-affirming and life-enhancing ways.

Thus, a culture of struggle has as a central contention that every constraint on human freedom and flourishing is immoral, unjust and unnatural as Anna Julia Cooper taught us. And this is so whether it is outright or disguised oppression or discrimination, imposed poverty, institutionalized ignorance and miseducation, monopolies of wealth and power or structured dependence of any person or people on another. A culture of struggle, then, of necessity holds with Malcolm X and Martin King that we have the right and responsibility to struggle against evil and injustice everywhere. King urges non-violent active resistance and Malcolm, leaving our options open, sanctions “freedom by any means necessary,” i.e., depending upon how the oppressor responds to our rightful resistance.

Even as a culture of struggle praises the people for its righteous and heroic resistance to oppression, it also condemns collaboration in one’s own oppression as immoral, cowardly and ultimately self-destructive. Frederick Douglass, speaking of the abolition of enslavement in the West Indies and the resistance of enslaved Africans, praised the enslaved Africans for seizing the initiative in their own struggle, and refusing to collaborate in their own oppression. He says that in their rebellions, “they bore themselves well. They did not hug their chains, but according to their opportunities, swelled the general protest against oppression.”

And in their righteous resistance, the enslaved Africans demonstrated to the enslavers that enslavement was wrong and came with considerable costs and consequences. Thus, Douglass says that abolitionists “showed that slavery was wrong”, but the enslaved Africans in resistance “showed it was dangerous as well as wrong.” Indeed, the oppressor has no right to security in the practice of oppression and no claim to peace in the practice of injustice.

Malcolm reminded us that there still exists contemporary versions of those “house negroes” who hugged their chains in the Holocaust of enslavement and those Africans working in the fields who hated their chains and dared to break them. “House” and “field” are symbolic types of collaborators and combatants, of the submissive and subversive, and either of them may, in real life, be in any social or physical location, and in any group or class. But a “house” position, i.e., a “higher class,” often cultivates a mentality of indictment, distance and disregard for the people, acute denial of discrimination and oppression, pathetic identification with the oppressor or established order, and satisfying oneself with a materially-comfortable and socially-cushioned place in oppression. And this is clearly “chain-hugging” in a most self-degrading and self-mutilating way. But to be righteously and irreversibly committed to liberation and justice and to oppose unfreedom and injustice everywhere and in every way possible is to be a breaker of chains and a way-opener for our people and humanity as a whole.

A culture of struggle grounds itself also in the fundamental understanding that we are our own liberators, that a people that cannot save itself is lost forever and that those who would be free must strike the first, the final and decisive blow. It is again A. Phillip Randolph, who reaffirmed that “salvation for any race, nation or class must come from within” and that at the heart of this social salvation is the disciplined and deep-rooted struggle for and achievement of a social justice which combines political freedom and the economic foundation to exercise and enjoy it.

Finally, a culture of struggle is unavoidably rooted in the hearts and minds of a people who are grounded in their own culture, clear-minded about their identity and the responsibility of caring for each other, undeterred by danger and obstacles of any kind, and consciously committed to an enlightened and liberating collective vision and vocation which informs and undergirds what Dr. Mary McLeod Bethune calls “our ceaseless striving and struggle” as a people. Indeed, as Frantz Fanon says, “the living expression of the nation is the consciousness-in-movement of the whole people. It is the coherent and enlightened practice of men and women.” This means boldly accepting the awesome responsibility and demands of our history and humanity. And this ethical obligation, as a world-encompassing conception, begins with ourselves and leads inevitably to a constant concern and ongoing active commitment to the well-being and good of the world.

Is Barack Obama, the nation’s first African American president, trying to kill Historically Black Colleges and Universities?

If he’s not, he’s going to have a difficult time convincing HBCU presidents, trustees and alumni. Surprisingly, Obama has become their worst nightmare.

Neither Obama, the First Lady, the Secretary of Education or the president’s closest advisers attended an HBCU and, consequently, are tone death in recognizing what is broadly viewed as sound policy can inadvertently harm our nation’s HBCUs.

President Obama’s proposal that the federal government pick up the tab for a worthy student’s first two years of community college is a case in point. Without a doubt, a move toward free, universal higher education is an excellent decision.

But if the president had consulted the major organizations representing HBCUs, he would have heard suggestions on how to tweak his proposal so that it would not needlessly harm Black colleges, which it is certain to do.

The amended Higher Education Act of 1965 defines an HBCU as: “…any historically black college or university that was established prior to 1964, whose principal mission was, and is, the education of black Americans, and that is accredited by a nationally recognized accrediting agency or association determined by the Secretary [of Education] to be a reliable authority as to the quality of training offered or is, according to such an agency or association, making reasonable progress toward accreditation.”

HBCUs enroll only 3 percent of college students yet are responsible for nearly 20 percent of all bachelor degrees awarded to African Americans. In some fields, the figures are significantly higher.

President Obama noted, “America thrived in the 20th century in large part because we had the most educated workforce in the world. But other nations have matched or exceeded the secret to our success.” And the U.S. can’t afford to lose the valuable contributions of HBCUs.

HBCUs compete directly with community colleges. Both enroll students who may need some additional tutoring or training before they are college ready. More importantly, students who enroll in community colleges and HBCUs are in dire need of financial assistance. If you make the first two years of college free to community college students – and not to HBCUs – you don’t have to be a rocket or social scientist to see that Black colleges will come out the losers.

And the bleeding doesn’t stop there.

If and when community college students decide to continue their education, they may be more inclined to transfer to a state-supported public university, where costs are cheaper than those of a private or public HBCU. In many instances, that state-supported university might accept all of the student’s credits whereas the Black institution might accept some of them.

Public HBCUs are likely to suffer under this scenario as well. If a Black student has attended a community college in Alabama, for example, he or she may be more prone to enroll in the University of Alabama or Auburn than they would if they had initially enrolled in Alabama A&M University or Alabama State. And given the costs, those students might totally bypass Tuskegee University, Talladega College or Stillman College, all private institutions.

Colleges such as Spelman and Morehouse, though harmed, can probably sustain the drop in enrollment. But without any adjustments, it could be the death knell for many others, including Miles College, Tougaloo, Paine and my alma mater, Knoxville College, which already has a foot in the grave.

With Republicans now in control of the House and Senate, it would have been far wiser for Obama to huddle with Republicans – whose presidents have been strong supporters of HBCUs over the years – to come up with a proposal that both sides could support. Going it alone, especially in this environment, virtually guarantees that the America’s College Promise program will go nowhere.

What should be done?

As one educator told me, it would have been better if Obama had said the federal government would pick up the first two years at a two- or four-year college. That would be better for most HBCUs. Because public tax dollars probably would not be designated for private colleges, the private and religious-affiliated institutions would still be in a bind.

As for the Republican majority accustomed to saying “no” to everything when they were out of power, education would be a good thing to say “yes” to. And correcting the blunders made by the White House may even help in reaching out to a broader political base, a goal the GOP claims it wants to achieve.

In the meantime, this new community college proposal, coming on the heels of the administration dropping the ball on Parent PLUS student loans that caused some HBCUs to lose as much as 20 percent of their student body and a proposed federal rating system that could also disadvantage some HCBUs, has some of Obama’s ardent supporters wondering if this is part of a plan to kill Black colleges. If it’s not, it may have the same sad effect.

George E. Curry, former editor-in-chief of Emerge magazine, is editor-in-chief of the National Newspaper Publishers Association News Service (NNPA.) He is a keynote speaker, moderator, and media coach. Curry can be reached through his Web site, www.georgecurry.com. You can also follow him at www.twitter.com/currygeorge and George E. Curry Fan Page on Facebook

Since 1971, the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC) has had many strong leaders. As the new 114th Congress of the United States begins, the CBC elected my fellow North Carolina native, Congressman G.K. Butterfield, as its new chairman. I have known the long time freedom fighter and a skillful leader for more than 45 years.

Given the numerous issues and challenges facing Black America, I predict that the CBC under Butterfield’s leadership, the CB will become reinvigorated. It was surprising to hear G.K. say upon being sworn it: “My leadership of this Caucus will be influenced by my experiences growing up in a segregated South. Jim Clyburn often says that, ‘We are the sum total of our experiences’ and that is so true. My life’s experiences are similar to many of my colleagues. We saw racism at its worst.”

Butterfield is from Wilson, N.C., about 65 miles southwest of my hometown of Oxford. In the 1960s, I frequently traveled to Wilson to meet with Milton Fitch, the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC) state field coordinator. Fitch and SCLC state field director Golden Frinks were two of my mentors during that period.

So when G.K. Butterfield says that he is going the lead the CBC in a manner that will be influenced by his experiences growing up in the segregated South, that is assurance that the CBC will be at the vanguard of the fight for freedom, justice and equality under Butterfield’s watch.

It will be an interesting tenure. The CBC has 46 members from 22 states, the District of Columbia and the Virgin Islands, the largest CBC delegation in its 44-year history. Will the increased size translate into increased legislative clout? While we can’t definitively answer that question yet, there certainly will be higher expectations of the CBC, even in a Republican-controlled House and Senate.

Butterfield correctly declared that Black America is in a state of emergency.

“For many Black Americans, they are not even close to realizing the American dream,” he explained. “Depending on where they live, an economic depression hangs over their head, and it is burdening their potential and the potential of their children. Black America is in a state of emergency today as it was at the turn of the century!”

As he made clear, Black lives do matter. All lives matter. Although there has been progress in the United States during the past 50 years towards racial justice, racial injustice and inequality still persist. As Congressman Butterfield noted when he was sworn in:

• African Americans earn $13,000 less per year than their White counterparts;

• The unemployment rate of African Americans has consistently been twice as high as for Whites for past 50 years and

• For every $100 in wealth of a White household, the Black household has only $6.

Congressman Butterfield and his colleagues in the Congressional Black Caucus cannot change America by themselves. They need and deserve our support. They need our voices and votes to join theirs. We need one another.

America is at another crossroad. Will we revive the U.S. economy and create a more inclusive democracy where race will not be the determining factor that determines the quality of life? We all have an obligation to help determine the answer to that question. May our leadership be blessed with the courage and determination to make a real and lasting difference. And let’s make sure we join them in striving for that goal.

Benjamin F. Chavis, Jr. is the President and CEO of the National Newspaper Publishers Association (NNPA) and can be reached for national advertisement sales and partnership proposals at: dr.bchavis@nnpa.org; and for lectures and other professional consultations at: http://drbenjaminfchavisjr.wix.com/drbfc

One week ago the movie Selma chronicling the 1965 march for voting rights in Alabama opened in broad release. In theaters throughout the world, multi-cultural, multi-generational audiences have been transported to the segregated South of 50 years ago to visually and viscerally experience the struggle of not just African Americans but progressive Americans who sought to combat injustice.

As an African American daughter of a homecare worker raised in the Deep South, and a white male veteran and grandson of a Pentecostal minister, the legacy of and fight for social and economic justice is part of our shared DNA. What is striking to the two of us is not just the storytelling in Selma about the movement, but the story it tells us about where we are today in the fight for equality.

The strides made in the civil rights movement were made because of coalitions both likely and unlikely. African Americans, Latino Americans, Native Americans, Asian Americans and White Americans; laborers, maids, teachers, and sanitation workers; entertainers, doctors, lawyers; Jews, gentiles, and agnostics—all of whom converged in rural communities and urban centers throughout the 60’s to compel America to fulfill its promise.

Dr. King saw both discrimination and poverty as the major social ills confronting America, saying “that the inseparable twin of racial injustice was economic injustice.” The Poor People’s Campaign launched under his watch was carried out in the wake of his assassination by the coalitions that anchored the movement. Consistent with the language that Congress used when enacting the Fair Labor Standards Act in 1938 to ensure “the minimum standard of living necessary for health, efficiency, and general well-being,” the campaign’s goal was to guarantee that every American had access to fair wages and housing. Yet despite some advances the chapter of this story is still incomplete.

Today most workers earning the minimum wage in cities across America still can’t make ends meet; and, often, basic protections like earned sick days and enforceable laws to combat stolen wages elude them. This is why in the past few years, retail, fast-food, homecare and airport workers in San Francisco, Seattle, and other cities have formed coalitions to elevate pay to a level where they can survive on a single job—not three.

Los Angeles has been a leader in this fight. In the past year, hotel and school district employees here have won raises as workers, community leaders, and families rally to demand change.

Despite being one of the wealthiest and most expensive cities to live in, nearly half of all workers in L.A. are paid less than $15 an hour. The numbers are much bleaker in communities of color.

Families can’t afford to live in Los Angeles on $19,000, the yearly take home salary for a worker earning California’s current minimum wage of $9 an hour. Gas prices, housing and the cost of basic necessities like groceries are unattainable in Los Angeles for an individual earning minimum wage, much less a family of three, four or five.

A movement--social, economic or political--is about the collective, which is why the same coalitions that formed in 1965 are coming together today to increase the minimum wage. Community organizations, construction workers, truck drivers, grocery workers, teachers, and others are coming together. A minimum wage increase in Los Angeles will allow retail employees, temporary staffers, homecare workers, laborers, college grads and seniors who’ve re-entered the workforce to sustain their basic needs and stimulate the local economy. The Economic Policy Institute has found that every dollar paid to workers results in $1.24 for the local economy.

Key industries like technology, real estate development, manufacturing, retail and Hollywood contribute to our thriving business environment. Corporate profits are at an all-time high; but for businesses to thrive, employees must too.

For every theater goer, minimum wage earner or maximum wage maker who applauded, cried, or expressed righteous indignation at the story told in Selma, we’d like to remind them that the story of economic justice is still being written in our country, city and state. In the words of Benjamin Todd Jealous, past president of the NAACP, “no person can maximize the American dream on the minimum wage.”

Laphonza Butler is the president of SEIU California representing 700,000 workers and SEIU-United Long Term Care Workers Union, representing more than 180,000 homecare workers statewide. Rusty Hicks is the Secretary Treasurer of the Los Angeles County Federation of Labor representing more than 300 unions and 600,000 workers.

If the celebration of the life and legacy of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. is to be more than a corporate and foundation-funded program of safe, de-Africanized and deculturalized remembrance; then, we, as a people, must reclaim him and reaffirm his rootedness in the AfricanAmerican community, its culture and history, and the ongoing tradition of righteous and relentless struggle for racial and social justice which defines it. If it is to be more than government ceremonies which officially and fatally fossilize King thru monuments, proclamations, plaques and speeches which each year, alter and strip his legacy of its life and its vital stress on struggle; then, we, as a people, must reclaim him, define, defend and keep his legacy alive thru constant reflection on it and thru making it a part of our personal and collective practice.

And if the celebration and central meaning of King’s life and legacy is to be more than routine religious rituals of raising his name and lowering his voice on racial justice and social struggle, and of calling for reconciliation without needed struggle, worthy goals, measurable gain or meaningful good; then we, as a people, must reclaim him, recover his vision of “the radical reconstruction of society” and reposition it back within the framework and forward thrust of our larger liberation struggle. It is on us, as a people, and it is an urgent and critical task and need, not only because of what it means to the recovery of the legacy of King, but also because of what it means for us as a people and our movement forward in these troubled and trying times of heightened and righteous resistance to police violence and the systemic violence of which it is a central part and signature practice.

In spite of post-racial illusions and aspirations, there can be no accurate or honest account, no critical understanding or appropriate appreciation of the life and legacy of Dr. King outside of the history, culture and struggle of his people, African Americans, of whom he is an undeniable part and an honored and righteous representative. Indeed, it is his people thru whom and with whom he would come into social consciousness, ground and center himself, determine and map out his mission, conceive and carry out his transformative work and immerse himself in our world-historical struggle.

King is neither baffled nor bewildered about the identity, integrity or inherent greatness and possibilities of his people who possess a “bottomless vitality” that enabled them “to grow and develop” even in the hell and horror of the Holocaust of enslavement. Thus, he embraces and grounds himself in the social justice tradition of his people which poses witness to truth, service to the people, and sacrifice in righteous struggle as morally imperative. And his studies and his insight and experiences gained in struggle, enhanced and expanded this understanding and commitment.

King’s conception of Black people in the U.S. was an expansive one, which posed them as a moral and social vanguard in this country as well as in the world. Thus, King understood and engaged Black people, as we say in Kawaida, as a key people in a key country whose liberation would not only free us and the country from the grotesque grasp of racism and capitalism, but bring the whole world closer to full and final liberation. For it would transform the U.S., from being a global force of corporate greed, aggression and imperial predation, to a force for freedom, justice, peace, material well-being and cooperative development in the world. Therefore, King asserts that “the hard cold facts of racial life in the world today indicate that the hope of the people of color in the world may well rest in the (African American) and (their) ability to reform the structures of racist imperialism from within and thereby turn the technology and wealth of the West to the task of liberating the world from want.”

Also, King, like Malcolm X, Mary McLeod Bethune, W.E.B. DuBois and others, linked our longing and struggle for freedom and justice with those of other oppressed and struggling people of the world. Indeed, he says, “the determination of the (African American) to win freedom from every form of oppression springs from the same profound longing for freedom that motivates oppressed people all over the world.” Furthermore, he stated that “the dynamic beat of deep discontent in Africa and Asia is at the bottom a quest for freedom and human dignity on the part of a people who have been victims of colonialism.” And surely, if questioned further, he would have included Native America, Haiti and the Caribbean, Latin America, Native Australia, Palestine and the Middle East—in a word, as he said above, “oppressed people all over the world.”

To talk of King, then, is to talk of his people, their hopes, history and aspirations and their struggles for freedom, justice, security, well-being, peace, mutual concern and caring, and shared good in the world. It is their cause and commitment to good in the world which he embraces, advocates and places before the country and the world. And it is both a particular and universal agenda, a Black Agenda, which speaks to the best of what it means to be both African and human in the world. It is the message of Maria Stewart, Harriet Tubman, Frederick Douglass, Anna Julia Cooper, Mary McLeod Bethune, Fannie Lou Hamer, Malcolm X, Ella Baker and others as well as Martin King, and a modern version of a millennia-old moral and spiritual tradition with origins at the dawn of human conscience and culture.

Yet, there is a tendency among too many of us, unlike others, to qualify our achievements in life, literature or leadership, repeatedly reassuring others that our achievements are not Black, but universal, and not just for Black people, but for everyone. Many feel that if we seek funding or favor, we cannot even claim our holidays, hopes or special dreams without de-Africanizing and deculturalizing them, and that we can only claim our faults—those real or imagined and assigned by the established order. And so, too many of us allow King to be defined out of his ethnic, communal and cultural context thru the racist irrationality that one can’t be great and Black too, or have an agenda that is particular and universal, Black and inclusively human at the same time. Thus, they collaborate, consciously or unconsciously, in shameful self-erasure.

King defines and condemns this societal practice as “cultural homicide” which denies and divests our people of peoplehood and personhood as men and women. And he calls on us to “boldly throw off the manacles of self-abnegation and say to (ourselves) and the world—‘I’m a man (or woman) with dignity and honor. I have a rich and noble history’,” and “Yes, I’m Black and I’m beautiful,” secure in our identity and determined to be free and flourish.

The Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) claims to be fundamentally different than its inglorious past under such leadership as the blatantly racist William Parker.It has had some forward progress, but not nearly as significant or sustainable as current police chief Charlie Beck claims.The lack of transparency in cases where LAPD officers kill Black men is the focus of today’s column.It is a troubling fact that in such cases, officers are overwhelmingly exonerated i.e., the shooting is found to be “in policy.”(The LA Police Commission, in personnel matters, does not have the final say; that authority rests with a Board of Rights made up predominantly of police but has civilian members as well.)

Among the most famous cases of LA police killing unarmed Black men and women was the shooting of unarmed Leonard Deadwyler in the early 1970s. He was stopped while taking his wife, who was in labor, to the hospital.The case was attorney Johnnie Cochran’s first taste of notoriety.Another case was the 1979 shooting of 39-year-old Eula Love, an African American widow, who was involved in a dispute with the gas company over a $69 unpaid bill.Officers were called to her home and during an argument she threw a knife at them and they shot her.

In 1999 Margaret Mitchell, a 55-year-old African American homeless woman was stopped by two LAPD officers, reportedly to determine if the shopping cart she had was stolen.An argument ensued and Mitchell allegedly pulled out a screwdriver and was shot by one of the officers..

This past August, within days of the Michael Brown killing in Ferguson, Mo, the Black community, especially, was outraged over the shooting of Ezell Ford, a 25-year-old African American known to be mentally ill.The Ford shooting was one of 28 officer-involved shootings last year, more on this later..

In 2012, LAPD officers fired 90 times at a 19-year-old Arab-American teenager who led police on a chase in the San Fernando Valley onto the 101 Freeway.He got out of the car and pointed what turned out to be a cell phone and officers opened fire.Another officer-involved shooting in 2008 involved a 21-year-old Pakistani American who was autistic.He was spotted by officers on patrol near an apartment complex in Hollywood.The officers found him lying in some bushes.As he was being questioned, he pulled out a knife and stabbed one of the officers in his hand.The officer fired several rounds, killing the man, whose family won a $1.7 million judgment against the city.

In the Ezell Ford case, Chief Beck withheld the release of the autopsy findings for several months, which infuriated concerned members of the community who felt withholding the autopsy findings was a gross lack of transparency.Beck stated he ordered the autopsy findings not be released so that potential witnesses would not be influenced by the findings.Beck also said it could be months before the investigation of Ford’s killing is completed.

Nonetheless, at a December 29, 2014 press conference, when the autopsy results were released, Beck made a point of saying the autopsy findings were consistent with the officers’ report of the shooting.This only heightened distrust of many in the community since, at that press conference, Beck also emphasized no conclusions should be made until the investigation was completed.Why then, at this early stage, did he conclude the autopsy findings coincided with the officers’ report?Could it be the chief, intentionally or not, attempted to exonerate the officers in the public’s mind well in advance of the completed investigation?

The autopsy disclosed that one officer shot Ford in the side and leg.Ezell Ford was reportedly on the ground and on top of the other officer, who said Ford attempted to take his weapon.The officer than allegedly reached around Ford and shot him in the back.Since the officer was on his back with Ford on top of him, unless he was a contortionist, it’s hard to imagine how he could manage to reach around Ford and shoot him in the back.

Also, not just LAPD’s lack of transparency but its manipulation of crime statistics is reprehensible. After months of questioning it recently surfaced that the department’s latest reports of an increase in violent crimes coincided with an LA Times investigation last summer that found LAPD significantly understated the city’s true level of crime when it misclassified nearly 1,200 serious, violent crimes as low-level offenses during a recent one-year period.How’s that for building the public’s trust!

At best, whatever progress LAPD has made can be described as beginning to chip away at a culture of arrogance and abuse and should not confused with fundamental change. Much of the Black community feels chief Beck’s claim of fundamental change within LAPD and his call for calm and peaceful demonstrations following Ezell Ford’s killing is disingenuous. The community, and young people, especially, see little, if any, difference in LAPD officers’ behavior in the streets. The manner in which Ezell Ford was killed is widely viewed as symptomatic of LAPD’s ongoing culture that necessitates periodic anti-police demonstrations, peaceful or otherwise.

Stuart Scott felt like family.For years, I have watched him on SportsCenter delivering the sporting news as only he could.His trademark expressions elevated the SportsCenter broadcast in ways that made us watch and listen with anticipation for one of his funky catchphrases.Of course we hoped that when we repeated the phrase the next day, we too, would deliver it like “straight butta”.Who else could say “swoopes there it is” and we knew exactly what he meant.

As his colleagues, the athletes that he covered, friends and sports fans pay homage to his incredible broadcast skills; I am struck and touched by his exuberant expressions of love and care for his daughters.He beamed with pride when talking about their accomplishments.He hugged them tightly, smiled broadly at the mere mention of their names and said that THEY not SportsCenter were the best things he’d ever done or would do. His actions and words were congruent when it came to his daughters. There was no mistaking where his true affections lay and when a father says to his daughters “you two are my heartbeat,” well its “like gravy on a biscuit, it’s all good.”

Stuart Scott showed us that the physical embrace of our children, the celebration of who they are, and unashamedly expressing words of love matters.Stuart Scott the father, a man who longed to walk his daughters down the aisle, who wistfully imagined them seeking a future home loan from him, painted a picture of one who understood the fragility of life and the preciousness of relationships. You cannot watch his speech from the 2014 ESPYS without sending up a prayer to the “big man” for his family especially his daughters, hoping that they will take comfort in knowing that they were the loves of his life and the desires of his heart.It is a blessing that his daughters will get to listen to his words over and over again and that gift is “as cool as the other side of the pillow”.

Grief has its own inscape and each of us will grieve our loss of his presence in our own way. Stuart Scott never asked why and I will honor him by reframing from the same.But I believe that we can all agree that there is nothing more beautiful, more magnificent than a father loving his daughters.And to that I say, booyah!

There they go again! Just as the Republican Party is poised to take control of Congress, a key official’s actions and words remind us – just in time for the Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Holiday – that it remains implacably hostile to what King represented and what the holiday stands for.

Louisiana blogger Lamar White Jr.’s revealing last week that Rep. Steve Scalise (R-La.), now the third-ranking officer in the GOP’s House majority leadership structure, spoke at a White-supremacist convention in 2002 while a state representative, set off the by now well-practiced minuet of yet another prominent conservative trying to distance himself or herself from having associated with bigots.

First, Scalise through a spokesperson acknowledged that he had spoken to the group, the European-American Unity and Rights Organization, or EURO, but said he had had no inkling of their anti- Black, -Hispanic and –Jewish views. No transcript or otherwise hard evidence of what Scalise said then has surfaced to contradict – or support – his assertion that he spoke only of general public-policy matters.

However, Scalise’s claim of ignorance about EURO produced widespread skepticism, even among some conservatives, given that he spoke to the group during its two-day convention at a hotel in his own district and that its racist views had been discussed in several recent local news articles.

EURO, which had been founded two years earlier by David Duke, the notorious racist and former Louisiana state legislator, had links to several other similar Southern-based racist groups, although, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center, which tracks U.S. hate groups, it was and is largely “a paper tiger, serving primarily as a vehicle to publicize Duke’s writing and sell his books.”

Nonetheless, like its confederates among hate groups, it was a poster-board for stomach-churning racist invective. For example, one post from 2007 denounced the increasingly multiracial character of today’s Germany, declaring, “The beautiful Germany of the 1930s with blonde children happily running through the streets has been replaced by a multi-racial cesspool. Out of work Africans can be seen shuffling along the same streets which used to be clean and safe in the days of [Hitler’s Nazi Party].”

The pushback forced Scalise to quickly issue another statement declaring that his appearance at the event was “a mistake in judgment,” caused by the organizational disarray of his scheduling team and this time he emphatically denied approving of EURO’s views. “I didn’t know who all of these groups were and I detest any kind of hate group,” Scalise told the New Orleans-based NOLA.com/Times-Picayune website. “For anyone to suggest that I was involved with a group like that is insulting and ludicrous.”

By then, prominent Republicans in Congress had begun speaking up in his defense, and Rep. Cedric Richmond, of New Orleans, Louisiana’s only Black Democratic Congressman, vouched for Scalise’s tolerance and integrity.

By the end of the week, those elements combined to take the steam out of the story. After all, one might also say, given the GOP’s voluminous recent record of bigoted comments and actions against Blacks and Hispanics, gays and lesbians, undocumented immigrants, and women, and its many racist references to President Obama, what’s “new” about a decade-and-more-old story of a Deep-South Republican’s trolling for votes among the nation’s most racist elements?

But what caught my attention most about this story was the largely ignored fact that in 1999 and again in 2004 Steve Scalise as a state representative was one of a very few Louisiana state legislators to vote against establishing a state holiday honoring Martin Luther King, Jr.

On those occasions, only three and six Louisiana state legislators, respectively, voted against those proposals. Why at the opening of the 21st century, after the King national holiday had been celebrated for 15 years, would any public official be against establishing an official state holiday? Doesn’t that call for an explanation? Are those votes the actions of someone who’s not a bigot? Are they the actions of someone who wouldn’t know they were at a White-supremacist conference despite being, literally, in the middle of it?

In all the hullabaloo about Scalise’s speaking before the EURO group, his anti-King votes have been overlooked. But don’t those votes also raise a question about the content of Steve Scalise’s character? Perhaps this month he’ll find a respectable forum and give a speech about that.

Lee A. Daniels is a longtime journalist based in New York City. His essay, “Martin Luther King, Jr.: The Great Provocateur,” appears in Africa’s Peacemakers: Nobel Peace Laureates of African Descent (2014), published by Zed Books.

Patrick Lynch, do you remember Oscar Grant? And if you do, Mr. “leader” of the New York Police Department Union, why do you pretend not to understand the reaction that many African American people have to the police killing of Black men? The official reaction to those killings and the arrogance with which many police officers (read Darren Wilson in Ferguson) respond to the fact that they have snuffed out a life.

If you don’t remember Oscar Grant, Mr. Lynch, I do. He was executed on the first day of the same month that President Barack Obama was inaugurated in 2009, ordered from a BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit) train in Oakland, Calif., and compliantly sitting on the platform when he and a group of friends were roughed up, and he was shot. Why? Because his murderer, Johannes Mehserle, said he mistook his Glock gun (with a weight of at least 28 ounces and perhaps as many as 38) for a Taser (which weighs seven ounces).

Just days after the killing, on Jan. 6, 2009, the San Francisco Chronicle described this fiction as “nonsense,” not only because firing a Taser has an entirely different protocol than firing a Glock, but also as noted by The Chronicle a Taser has to be turned on and off, and a Glock does not. Furthermore, Mesherle had used his Taser earlier in the same evening he killed Oscar Grant. He should have known the difference.

I think of Oscar Grant because I spent part of my end-year holiday in San Francisco and Oakland visiting my mom and family. I think of him because I have two nephews, 31 and 28, who regularly rode BART and had life threatening encounters with the BART police. I don’t think of Oscar Grant because of Michael Brown or Eric Garner, because I think of him every January 1. When we wish each other “Happy New Year,” I am bitterly reminded that he won’t have one. Oscar Grant was executed six years ago, and not much has changed in six years, 60 years or two centuries.

Where did the murderer Johannes Mehserle get his police training? In a crackerjack box or an amusement park? Oscar Grant paid the ultimate price, and his family, his baby daughter, paid the price for Johannes Mehserle’s ignorance and murderous actions. Meanwhile, Johannes Mehserle has been able to move through his life, often with the help and support of “law enforcement” agencies.

Johannes Mehserle was so arrogant that he refused to appear at an investigative meeting ordered by his superiors in early January 2009. He sent his lawyer instead and then immediately resigned from BART. It took nearly a month for the Oakland Police Department to arrest Mehserle. His crime was so egregious, his conflicting descriptions of it so glaring, that a judge set his bail at $3 million. He spent 11 months in jail before he was tried in Los Angeles, and convicted of involuntary manslaughter, not murder. He was sentenced to a scant two years and served a meager 11 months in jail before he was released.

Years later, Oscar Grant’s family and the several friends who were also brutally beaten received about $2.8 million in a settlement from a lawsuit. Then, Johannes Mehserle had the temerity to appeal his conviction, with his attorney’s arguing, “All he did was make a mistake.” Fortunately, the State Supreme Court rejected his appeal.

The Mehserle attorneys showed as much a disregard for Black life as the Mehserle execution did. Johannes Mehserle wanted to clear his record. What about Oscar Grant’s life? Patrick Lynch asked that New York protests stop to “respect” the lives of New York police officers so callously terminated. With all due respect and with sorrow and horror, one might ask who ever stopped, paused, considered the life of Oscar Grant.

Mehserle and his team would argue that he is “remorseful” for killing Oscar Grant. He sobbed his way through his testimony in the trial that resulted in his conviction, but one might wonder whether his tears were genuine or designed to lower his sentence. The fact that he appealed his conviction suggests that his remorse, if he had any, was limited.

Johannes Mehserle had the temerity to appeal his conviction, just as some in the New York Police Department had the temerity to turn their backs on their boss, New York Mayor Bill de Blasio. Temerity can be described as audacity, boldness, nerve, gall, and impudence. Or it can be described as a simple indifference to Black life. That’s why it must be asserted that #Blacklivesmatter.

The audacity of explanations, not the murders of Oscar Grant, Eric Garner, Michael Brown, Tamir Rice and so many others explains some of the tension between African Americans and “law enforcement.” You see, while many police perceive most African Americans as potential criminals, many African Americans recognize police officers as potential Johannes Mesherle or Darren Wilson. If Patrick Lynch and his ilk want to stop the tension, perhaps they ought to eliminate their audacious disregard for Black life. Julianne Malveaux is an author and economist based in Washington, D.C.

The 2015 Martin Luther King, Jr. National Holiday should have a different impact on the collective consciousness of Black America. Why? Because once again there are millions of Black Americans who are more determined than ever to keep pushing forward to achieve full freedom, justice, equality and empowerment. The historic methodology, style and substance of Dr. King’s leadership needs to be reclaimed by those with the heavy responsibility to lead.

By re-embracing Dr. King’s prophetic activism and mobilization genius, I believe Black American leaders of national organizations will be effective in countering the backward drift of voter suppression, racism, violence and hopelessness. The tone set in the King Holiday ceremonies this year should focus on achieving equality and economic empowerment for all.

Martin Luther King, Jr. was a strong, visionary, mesmerizing leader. He used nonviolent civil disobedience as an effective strategy. He challenged injustice everywhere while generating enough political capital that led to the enactment of the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the 1965 Voting Rights Act. Shortly before King’s assassination in April 1968, he was clear about the need to secure economic justice en route to becoming what he called the “Beloved Community.”

Over the past year, there have been numerous demonstrations across the nation demanding racial justice in the wake of police killing of Michael Brown, Eric Garner, Tamir Rice, and Rumain Brisbon. It was a positive sign of progress to witness street protests that, in the spirit of Dr. King, setranscended race and class. All forms of injustice must be opposed. It was Dr. King who reminded us that “an injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.”

As was the case in the past, young people today are only less prejudiced than their parents and preceding generations. Even so, emerging young leaders are not relenting – they are pushing forward with renewed energy, conviction and vigor. In fact, we should not forget that Martin Luther King was only 26 years old in 1955 when he became the primary spokesman for the nascent Montgomery Bus Boycott Movement.

Many campaigning for public office are looking beyond MLK Day to the 2016 U.S. presidential race. Our challenges if to make sure the quest for equality and justice does not get placated by the politics of expediency. In other words, the momentum to transform America evident in 2014 should not be allowed to dissipate over the next year.

Now that the U.S. economy continues to rebound, efforts to end poverty in our communities should be significantly increased. Interestingly, those who opposed President Barack Obama blamed him for things that were already bad when he assumed office. And now that the economy has improved, they refuse to give him credit for the recovery.

As we prepare to celebrate the birthday of Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., we should remember that he concluded that economic justice was also a key civil rights issue. Two weeks before Dr. King was murdered, he addressed a rally in Memphis of American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME). King stated, “Now our struggle is for genuine equality, which means economic equality……. For we know now that it isn’t enough to integrate lunch counters. What does it profit a man to be able to eat at an integrated lunch counter if he doesn’t have enough money to buy a hamburger?”

Dr. King was on point.

Today, the struggle is not just about having more money to buy something. It is about knowing how to more effectively invest and spend the $1.1 trillion that Black Americans are expected to spend annually by 2015. It is about owning more businesses in our communities. In the tradition of Dr. King, we have to wisely leverage our huge consumer power.

We are grateful that the legacy of Dr. King’s leadership continues to be vibrant and relevant to the advancement of the cause of freedom and justice. We, therefore, face the future with a stronger confidence that we still shall overcome, largely by reclaiming Dr. King’s legacy.

Benjamin F. Chavis, Jr. is the President and CEO of the National Newspaper Publishers Association (NNPA) and can be reached for national advertisement sales and partnership proposals at: dr.bchavis@nnpa.org; and for lectures and other professional consultations at: http://drbenjaminfchavisjr.wix.com/drbfc